1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

  2. LIVE WATCH EVENT
    The NBA Draft is here! Come join Clutch in the ClutchFans Room Wednesday night at 6:30pm CT as we host the live online NBA Draft Watch Party. Who will the Rockets select at #3?

    NBA Draft - LIVE!

As "Road Map" fails Israeli urges one state solution.

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by glynch, Sep 23, 2003.

  1. glynch

    glynch Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    17,837
    Likes Received:
    3,420
    This is an interesting article. It says that the Road Map is the last and failing chance for a two state solution. Israel has chosen to keep building to make a viable Palestinian state impossible.

    Israel is moving toward Aprtheid to control the emerging Palestinian majority. 500,000 Israelis no longer live in Israel. The Jewish majority is falling. Harsher and harsher measures are being taken to maintain that majority-- at least among "citizens".
    The one state solution eliminates the need to force israel to give up land and makes the right of return for Palestinain reugees a non-issue. A shortened verrsion of the article is below.
    ***********
    September 19, 2003

    End of the Road Map
    Preparting for the Struggle Against Apartheid
    By JEFF HALPER

    ...
    Looked at from the ground up, from the perspective of Israel's completion of its three-decade campaign to create irreversible "facts on the ground," the road map represents the last gasp of the two-state solution. This is the crunch. As anyone who has spent even a few hours in the Occupied Territories readily understands, Israel has entered in the last phase of fully and finally incorporating the West Bank into Israeli proper, of transforming a temporary occupation into a permanent state of apartheid.

    Sharon's implementation of Jabotinsky's doctrine of the "Iron Wall" establishing such massive "facts on the ground" that the Palestinians will despair of ever having a viable state of their own has reached its critical mass. The Israeli settlement blocs are so extensive, their incorporation into Israel proper by a massive system of highways and "by-pass roads" so complete and the Separation Wall physically confining the Palestinians to tiny cantons so advanced as to render any genuine two-state solution impossible and ridiculous.

    ... we must view the road map as a watershed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Its final failure will alter fundamentally the entire nature of struggle for a just and sustainable solution to the Palestinian issue.

    The problem has less to do with vision, content and process than with implementation. As a document, the road map has a number of commendable elements. It is the first international document approved by the US that calls for "an end to the Occupation." Indeed, it is the first that uses the term "occupation" at all, defying Israel's longstanding denial that it even has an occupation.

    It is also the first initiative that sets as a goal the establishment of a viable Palestinian state, putting it far beyond the vague and open-ended negotiations of the Oslo Accords. The mere use of the term "viable" raised hopes that the international community had finally gotten wise to Israel's strategy of creating "facts on the ground" that prejudice any negotiations and render a genuine Palestinian state impossible.

    The fact that the time-line was short and finite an independent, democratic, and viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel by the year 2005 stood the road map in good stead. So, too, did the performance-based, mutual nature of the process, monitored by the Quartet rather than by the Americans exclusively, and the fact that the terms of reference included UN resolutions, agreements previously reached by the parties and the Saudi initiative. ...


    But, as everyone knew from the start, the will to make it work was lacking. ...

    To be sure, Sharon, in signing on to the road map, declared his support for the two-state solution. The great danger facing Palestinians in the limbo of a non-dead road map process is that his version of a Palestinian state a truncated bantustan with no control of its borders, no freedom of movement, no economic viability, no access to its water resources, no meaningful presence in Jerusalem and no genuine sovereignty, one that leaves Israel with 90% of the country will be "sold" by the US as a viable Palestinian state,...

    The looming failure of the road map to prevent de facto apartheid in Palestine-Israel will fundamentally alter the entire nature of the conflict. Israel by its own hand has rendered a viable two-state solution impossible. The only Palestinian "state" that could emerge from Israel's matrix of control is a Palestinian bantustan.

    Assuming this is not an acceptable "solution," only one other possibility exists: the creation of a single state in Palestine-Israel.
    ...
    The Impending Struggle for a Single State

    The stage is thus set for the next phase of the struggle for a just resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: an international campaign for a single state. Since the Palestinian and Jewish populations are so intermingled (a million Palestinians live throughout Israel while some 400,000 Jews live throughout the Occupied Territories), the feasibility of a bi-national state, with the two peoples living in a kind of federation, seems unworkable.

    ... Given this "reality" on the ground, the most practical solution seems to be a unitary democratic state offering equal citizenship for all. If that is the case, our slogan in the post-road map period will be that of the South Africans' struggle against apartheid: One Person, One Vote.

    In this indeterminate twilight of the road map, we are still in a transition from the two-state solution in which our energies are devoted to ending the Occupation to a campaign for a single state, which acknowledges that the Occupation is permanent and therefore seeks to neutralize its controlling aspects by creating a common state framework. None of the actors are yet ready for such a shift -- not the Palestinians, not the international community, not the peace and human rights activists, not world Jewry and certainly not Israeli Jews....

    (1) In our framing of the campaign for a single state, we should stress that as much as Israel might object, it is its own settlement and incorporation policies that are responsible..... As in the case of South Africa, however, where apartheid was put in place by white South African governments, Israel has only itself to blame if it has created, through its own settlement and occupation policies, a single state. ...

    Perhaps the realization of where Israel is headed will finally impel its Jewish public to reject policies, parties and leaders that maintain the Occupation. In that case the two-state option may be revisited. Until that happens, however, the priority of a campaign for a single state has been dictated by Israel itself.

    (2) We must shift the focus of our efforts from ending the Occupation (which, when the road map fails, we must all admit will never happen) to achieving a democratic state. The slogan "One Person, One Vote" should provide a common mobilizing call for an international movement that must reach the scope and effectiveness of the campaign against South African apartheid. Indeed, the emergence of a single state as an agreed-upon goal something we lack today will make organizing much easier....


    (3) We should couch our campaign in the language and requirements of human rights and international law. A campaign for a democratic state is intended to secure the rights of all the country's inhabitants; it is not against the Israeli people or seeking in any way to delegitimize Israeli society or culture.

    Upholding the notion that the security and well-being of all the peoples of the region is guaranteed only through a political solution that addresses every people's human rights and that national self-determination will have to find its expression through a regional Middle East Union we must present the single democratic state as a vehicle that will facilitate collective and individual rights rather than posing a threat. ...

    (4) We should call on the Jewish public Israeli and diaspora to avoid the suffering witnessed in the struggle against apartheid in South Africa and engage pro-actively in this best chance for a just, secure and positive resolution to an otherwise irresolvable conflict. More than anything else, Zionism was about Jews taking responsibility for their own fate.

    A Jewish state has proven politically and, in the end, morally untenable. It is time we salvage the good parts of Israel its vibrant national culture, society, institutions and economy and let go of that which cannot be saved: exclusive "ownership" of a country in which the Jews will soon be the minority.

    (5) We must recreate an international movement similar to the anti-apartheid one. This will be difficult; Israel has far greater credibility and support than apartheid did. But we find a way to link the many disparate NGOs and activist groups into a coherent and coordinated network focusing on the issue of the democratic state itself, and then forge them into a worldwide movement that goes far beyond our various groups and networks.

    The Unitary State of Palestine/Israel: Fears and Opportunities

    Although the establishment of a single democratic state in Palestine was long the program of the PLO, it is a truly wrenching option for many Palestinians today. Even if it acquires a Palestinian majority, a single state will have to incorporate a strong Israeli-Jewish society, culture, institutions and economy which, as in the case of the Europeans in South Africa, will not merely disappear.

    Besides having to share a state with others, thus not achieving full self-determination, some Palestinians fear that they may become a subordinate underclass in their own country. Thus, despite their grave doubts over implementation, many Palestinians are reluctant to abandon the road map or to contemplate the demise of the two-state solution.

    For the Israelis, too, the prospect of a single state is obviously wrenching. Indeed, since a Jewish-Israeli state already exists, its transformation into a single state including a Palestinian majority is far more threatening to them. It means the end of Zionism, the end of a Jewish state qua Jewish state. But the Israeli public has only itself to blame. Despite repeated warnings from intellectuals in the critical peace camp, it allowed successive governments, Labor as well as Likud, to lock it into such a distressing situation.

    ...
    As an Israeli, I must say that the prospect of a single state encompassing our two peoples challenges rather than threatens me. Even without the Occupation, the notion of a Jewish state is demographically impossible, and Israel faces a fundamental transformation. Most Jews some 75% of them never came to Israel. Wherever they had a choice, most Jews preferred to migrate elsewhere. The Jewish majority stands at only 72% and is dwindling in relation to the growing Palestinian-Israeli population, the influx of some 400,000 non-Jewish immigrants from the former Soviet Union, and large-scale emigration (it is estimated that up to a half million Israeli Jews live permanently abroad).

    Maintaining a "Jewish" state on such a narrow base is becoming increasingly non-sustainable. The measures Israel must take to ensure its "Jewish character" are becoming progressively more repressive. By law "non-Jews" are forbidden to buy, rent, lease or live on "state lands" 75% of the country. The Palestinian citizens of Israel, almost 20% of the population, are confined to 2% of the land. Only a few weeks ago the Knesset enacted a law preventing Palestinian citizens of Israel from bringing their spouses from the Occupied Territories to live with them in Israel.

    An Israel belonging to all its citizens and beyond that, a democratic state of Israel-Palestine will finally release us from the preoccupation with the "demographic bomb" and lead us into a productive involvement in the wider region.....

    As cultural Zionists like Ahad Ha-am, Martin Buber and Judah Magnes argued, Jewish national identity does not require a state of its own, only a cultural space where it may develop and flourish. For all its shortcomings, the state of Israel provided that cultural space. The vitality of Israeli culture, society, polity and economy is no longer dependent upon a state structure, a kind of political "greenhouse."

    "Israeliness" has reached a stage of maturity that it no longer needs the protection of a state and, indeed, is being held back by it, since the conflicts that state generates prevents healthy social and cultural development. A true homecoming in which Israeli "natives" engage with their neighbors in a peaceful and prosperous Middle East marks, if you will, the ultimate triumph of Zionism ("triumph" in its own terms, not over anyone else).

    Still, two major reservations of Jews to a single state must be noted and addressed. First, the issue of self-determination. For nationalist Jews, the issue of cultural development was subordinated to the perceived need to control their destiny, to never again be dependent upon others given the Jews' history of persecution. Since the vast majority of Jews chose to settle abroad and not in Israel (including a considerable portion of Israeli Jews themselves), this issue seems to be moot. It is doubly moot given the fact that the Jewish majority in Israel is dwindling, and that exclusive control cannot be reconciled with democracy.

    For better or worse, the internal contradictions between control of one's destiny and living as a minority among others become too great to reconcile. Those of us in the Israeli peace movement would argue that Jewish security is best protected in an inclusive world order based on the enforcement of human rights and international law.

    The other objection to a single state revolves around the issue of refuge. Where could Jews find refuge in a time of need a pertinent question given the Jewish experience (including recent ones of Ethiopian Jews). If the vision of a single state is founded on the belief that Israeli Jews and Palestinians can live together in peace and mutual respect, then this concern could be addressed by an article in the new state's constitution specifying that both Jews and Palestinians possess the right of return to the country, and that members of both peoples in need of refuge will be automatically accepted. The very enactment of such a law would go a long way towards assuring each people of the good intentions of the other.

    For Palestinians, too, the prospect of a single state need not appear a concession to the idea of self-determination in a state of their own. A single state would give Palestinians access to the entire country and would resolve absolutely the issue of refugee return. Since the Palestinians will become the majority between the Jordan and the Mediterranean within a decade, they will exert a considerable measure of self-determination and will, to a large extent, set the tone for the country.

    The issue of Palestinian national expression still remains outstanding, however. Since 1948 the very character of the Palestinian people has been changed from a people living on its native land to a diaspora nation comprised of refugees, the "internally displaced" and those who have made new lives abroad. The vital Palestinian Diaspora will certainly play a key role in developing the Palestinian sector as well as the state as a whole, and will provide a counterweight to internal Israeli hegemony.

    Although the failure of the road map marks the end of two nationalisms Israeli Jewish and Palestinian the prospect of a unitary democratic state offers integration, security, development, a mode of life far more conducive to the modern world than narrow sectarian states.

    If the road map fails and with it the two-state solution, it is hoped that Israel will finally realize the futility of pursuing the path of domination and apartheid, and will pro-actively seize the opportunity to create for itself and its neighbors a peaceful Middle East in which Israeli Jews and Palestinians together will be among the leading forces for democratization and development.

    Jeff Halper is the Coordinator of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions and the author of An Israeli in Palestine (Pluto Press: forthcoming). He can be reached at icahd@zahav.net.il



    link
     
  2. Mr. Clutch

    Mr. Clutch Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2002
    Messages:
    46,550
    Likes Received:
    6,131
    There sure is a lot of crazy **** in that post, glynch.
     
  3. bamaslammer

    bamaslammer Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Messages:
    3,853
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ok.....that is some radical stuff there. And geez, do I sense a bit of anti-semitism, pro-"Palestinian" bias in that piece.
     
  4. Cohen

    Cohen Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 1999
    Messages:
    10,751
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gee, don't know cause I didn't read it.

    I go to the source link first to see if it's worthy. Their link of the day...'FromOccupiedPalestine.org'...pretty much said it all.
     
  5. glynch

    glynch Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    17,837
    Likes Received:
    3,420
    Gee, don't know cause I didn't read it.


    Too bad, it is an interesting article that might open up your mind to some facts and what might happen if Israel keeps annexing and spending billions to put highways and major settlements throughout the occupied territories.
     
    #5 glynch, Sep 23, 2003
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2003
  6. mrpaige

    mrpaige Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2000
    Messages:
    8,831
    Likes Received:
    15
    I guess the author is one of them self-hating Jews, eh?

    I thought his theories were interesting, though there's a lot of pie-in-the-sky thinking there. There's no mention of a potential downside. Even with Constitutional protections, security is not assured. It may be trading one group oppression for another.

    Not that I have a better idea.
     
  7. Cohen

    Cohen Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 1999
    Messages:
    10,751
    Likes Received:
    6
    I don't mind reading differing opinions. I clicked on your thread, didn't I? ;) But I refuse to waste my time or mind reading 'articles' from the extremely biased.
     
  8. glynch

    glynch Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    17,837
    Likes Received:
    3,420
    I thought his theories were interesting, though there's a lot of pie-in-the-sky thinking there.

    Mrpaige, I think that may be true that it is pie-in -the sky type thinking-- at least at this time..

    The author is not saying he is against the Roadmap. Just that it is dead. He thinks it is the last gasp of the two state solution and he is thinking ahead.

    If Israel keeps spending billions and billions on building permanent infrastructure, there will come a time when it will be almost impossible to have a viable Palestinian State. At that time the one state, secular, non-dicriminatory democracy for all who live on the land, like we have in the US, may be the alternative. Aparthied systems tend to be unstable.

    It just is getting harder for Israel to give up thousands and thousands of newly constructed homes. It also sounds like they have built literally hundreds of miles of new highways for Jews only. The new security wall apparently rivals the Berlin Wall in size.

    Looking at it objectively, just from a construction point of view it looks like the present Israeli leadership has no intention of handing back enough land to create a viable Palesinian State. It is interesting to consider the alternative.
     
  9. StupidMoniker

    StupidMoniker I lost a bet

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2001
    Messages:
    15,301
    Likes Received:
    2,267
    So the response to never-ending Palestinian terrorist action should be to not only give them there own state, but to give them all of Israel as well. If Israel were willing to accept this solution, they would have just agreed to the Saudi plan and given the Palestinians right of return. It is in effect the same thing, the dissolution of Israel and the formation of a Palestinian state where is once stood. Yeah, I don't think that is going to happen. The Palestinians will either have to continue on the road there are on now, or realize that it is time to give up and head for greener pastures.
     
  10. mrpaige

    mrpaige Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2000
    Messages:
    8,831
    Likes Received:
    15
    I could support such a single state. The fear, though, is that a Palestinian majority would simply oppress the Jewish minority and that it would not be a secular state.

    But he's talking about an ideal, in many ways. Just because implementation of such a plan would not be as pain-free as the proposal doesn't mean the theory and arguments should be dismissed out of hand.

    One of the things that people have feared in terms of a Palestinian state is that simply creating a state would not solve the problem, especially since there are some Arabs who still view destruction of Israel as the ultimate goal.

    An Israel/Palestinian single state that protects the rights and culture of the minority population would seem to prevent attacks on the state itself (since it would be a Palestinian-majority state). It may be that the best way to preserve the Jewish culture, etc. is to cede control over their own country, as long as their rights are secured within the new state.

    But the cynic in me says the implementation would not end up protecting the rights of the Jewish minority, and that would cause it's own problems.

    But I do like the idea of thinking of new ideas. Perhaps by exploring them, a solution will emerge. Even if this isn't a solution, it's worth thinking through, at least in my opinion.
     
  11. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    An accurate point, but as I'm sure you're aware, also a point used for many years to put off South African political equality.
     
  12. mrpaige

    mrpaige Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2000
    Messages:
    8,831
    Likes Received:
    15
    Yeah, but it was a weaker argument in South Africa, in my opinion.

    With the stated aim of some Arab groups being the extermination of the Jews, it becomes very important to make sure that doesn't happen, especially since Israel still houses roughly a third of the World's Jewish population.

    Setting the stage to lose another five or six million Jews is not a way I'd like to go.

    So those fears need to be addressed and backed up. I would be afraid that the United Nations would simply choose not to act until it was too late (and possibly not even then).

    But I'm not saying the idea should be ignored because of those fears. I just think that because of those fears are not completely without merit, there needs to be a mechanism to address them and a mechanism to back up whatever solution there is.
     
  13. glynch

    glynch Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    17,837
    Likes Received:
    3,420
    I have read that Moshe Dayan, right after Israel seized the post 1967 territories expected to incorporate the Palestinians into a greater Israel.

    If they could form such a state, I don't think the residents, including the Palestinians would give a damn what the other Arabs thought. Mayby they could reach this state instead of asserting old fears about: "driving the Jews into the sea" or the Palestinians would never accept this or the Jews just have to be in control or whatever.

    Both sides would win something they can't win with a two state solution. They would all have access to the whole region. No need to quibble over Jerusalem, block by block. Certain religious Jews demand access to the whold land for religious reasons Many of the Palestinians could at least visit their ancestral lands. The economy might even work better as the Jews would have more ready access to the younger Palestinian population etc.
     
  14. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    49,289
    Likes Received:
    17,892
    I see your point about the groups that want to get rid of all jewish people. I think the key would be to continue and have an increased effort to rid the Palestinian ranks of terrorism. I also think the idea is somewhat pie in the sky thinking, but it would be more feasable if we knew that terrorism would be cracked down on.

    I've always been against the idea of no progress toward the two state solution or any solution until the terrorism stops. I think you move toward peace and continue to fight the terrorism that exists. Letting the terrorists stop the peace only helps their cause.
     
  15. mrpaige

    mrpaige Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2000
    Messages:
    8,831
    Likes Received:
    15
    I agree with that. Working toward peace should always be the goal, and being willing to try new potential solutions and always being open-minded toward a potential solution is important, in my opinion.

    There are groups of people in this World who's purpose for living is to disrupt peace. They will always exist, but just because they exist, that doesn't mean we can't continue to strive to better ourselves and our situations.
     
  16. StupidMoniker

    StupidMoniker I lost a bet

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2001
    Messages:
    15,301
    Likes Received:
    2,267
    The basis of any deal between Israel and Palestine has always been land for peace. In this case peace means a stop to terrorism. Without that there IS no deal. That is why talks falter when terrorism continues. When all you bring to the table is stopping terror attacks, you don't get anything when the attacks don't stop.
     
  17. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    49,289
    Likes Received:
    17,892
    That has been the basis and it's a bad premise. It should be land because it's a just thing to do, and always work on the peace regardless. There are significant groups in Israel that do not want to give up land, and will do things to jeopardize the peace. There are groups of Palestinians that don't want a settled solution and aren't for peace, and they will jeopardize any deals like that.

    The Palestinians should fight terrorism and get their own state. Once they get their own state fighting terrorist groups should continue. But giving terrorists the power to determine whether there is a two state solution and prolong the oppression, and injustice for everyone gives them too much power. It's time to take the power away from the terrorists.

    Don't give the terrorists that much power. They know that now they can derail peace anytime they want. The best way would be to say to the terrorists it doesn't matter how hard you try we are going to go ahead with a peace plan that ends in a two state solution, and we crack down on you before during and after that peace process. Tell the terrorists that matter what their tactics are it won't work, and they can no longer stand in the way of progress.
     
  18. StupidMoniker

    StupidMoniker I lost a bet

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2001
    Messages:
    15,301
    Likes Received:
    2,267
    What does peace mean in your post? :confused: You say that the terrorists know they can derail peace whenever they want. Of course they can, because when there are terror attacks happening, that is not peace. What you mean is that you want Israel to give up all of the land for nothing AND not respond when their are terror attacks. I think that the chances of Israel, or any country for that matter, agreeing to your plan are slim to none, and doing so would be idiotic anyway.
     
  19. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    49,289
    Likes Received:
    17,892
    It's only idiotic to people who like the cycle of violence and oppression that is currently in place. There are enough people on both sides who do seem satisfied with that cycle, that they may not agree to doing things differently.

    I meant a peace plan which would eventually lead to a more stable peace. That is what I meant by derailing the peace.

    I never said I want Israel to not respond to terror attacks. I just don't want Israel to respond by stopping talks that would lead to a just and fair two state solution. I said that terrorists should be pursued at the beginning, middle, and after the process. I think that the U.S. and UN should get involved in stopping it, perhaps as part of the peace process and negotiations. The main thing I want Israel to give up is unjust occupation, and oppression. They shouldn't need anything in return, but what they will get when both sides agree to a fair solution would be a real road to peace, and that would be great for the country of Israel. My other main objective is to halt the terrorism, and take the power out of their hands.

    To continue to scrap the peace process everytime a terrorist bombing happens obviously isn't making matters any better.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now